Away New York Knicks Sunday Nov 25 2012

And what would have happened in this game if Drummond and Monroe had played together? One of those two would have had to guard Carmelo. Not an ideal matchup. Melo can just shoot from outside or just drive past Monroe

Click to expand...

Not like Maxiell did any better than Monroe would have. At least with Drummond out there, there is shot altering behind Monroe, making Melo think twice about driving past. If fouls became an issue, then this would need a re-think (and it did seem NY was getting the benefit on both ends mostly).

Now, (again, in my argument with myself), what about offense? If one of those two has to guard Carmelo, doesn't that mean that Carmelo has to guard one of those two? Yes, probably. What I would do if I were Woodson would be to put Chandler on Monroe and Anthony on Drummond.

Click to expand...

You really think Woodson would have put Carmelo on Drummond?!

Say he did then. Chandler on Monroe also pulls Chandler away from the basket opening the lane - put the ball in Monroe's hands and you have one of our best passers being able to get the ball by their biggest defender out on the elbow with a pass. Not a bad result if you ask me when the help D on a cutting Singler, BK, Prince is Melo coming off Drummond.

Also you'd think Drummond would at least have the ability to back down someone of Melo's size and limited defensive ability. He doesn't have to score either as help D would likely come the closer he gets to the basket and there's an outlet pass to an open Singler/BK.

And If no help comes, it's not a stretch to think Drummond has the ability to pick up the ball and go over Melo to the basket from a couple feet out. We have seen him do a couple of up and under shots too.

I may have made that a little simplistic, but when it comes down to it there is something which is getting constantly asked - when it was all as bad as it was, where is the harm in trying it?!

There's no doubt that Drummond's numbers are better than Maxiell's. I could make the argument that he's playing primarily against bench players so that skews the results, but I don't really care about that.

One could also make the argument that just because he's getting these numbers in the role he has now does not mean that he will make those numbers in the role everyone wants him in.

But I would like, instead, to make the point that if the team simply put out its best five guys (based on current PER), they would be running out a lineup of Middleton/Daye/Maxiell/Drummond/Monroe. Now, obviously this is nonsense, because Maxiell, Drummond, and Monroe all play frontcourt positions and Middleton and Daye are based on production in garbage time. But then (in my argument with myself), I might point out that competition level should also negate some of Drummond's production, so I can't get rid of that from consideration. Basically, the big problem with this lineup is overlap and team balance.

So let's consider the whole thing from a team balance perspective - let's say you run out a lineup of Knight/Singler/Prince/Monroe/Drummond (as most people here seem to feel would be reasonable). What does that offense look like? Drummond is not a threat for a jump shot, but if you leave him down low, that eliminates part of Monroe's post game because it clogs up the lane and allows other teams to knock the ball away from Greg (who does not have great hands).

And what would have happened in this game if Drummond and Monroe had played together? One of those two would have had to guard Carmelo. Not an ideal matchup. Melo can just shoot from outside or just drive past Monroe; if you put Drummond on him, then you've taken Drummond away from the basket and negated his strengths.

Now, (again, in my argument with myself), what about offense? If one of those two has to guard Carmelo, doesn't that mean that Carmelo has to guard one of those two? Yes, probably. What I would do if I were Woodson would be to put Chandler on Monroe and Anthony on Drummond. Great - Anthony sucks defensively but instead of taking advantage of that mismatch, now he doesn't have to worry about anything other than the occasional put-back dunk. Meanwhile, Monroe has Chandler, who's effectively negating him. By pairing Monroe with Maxiell, you're giving your team some semblance of offensive balance that doesn't exist (yet, hopefully) with Monroe and Drummond, and making Anthony work more (in theory).

If you pair Drummond and Monroe right now, they have to work together. Drummond, though, is primarily an opportunist - he gets a lot of points off of assists and second-chance buckets. Monroe gets those, too, remember, so Drummond is going to cut a little into his numbers. Defensively, they could be solid, but just because they're tall does not mean that they're good. It's easy to get both of them out of position, and Monroe is not quick enough nor enough of a shot-blocker to make up for those lapses.

I said it earlier and I'll say it again - NY is a terrible matchup for Detroit. As long as Drummond doesn't offer much more than defense and rebounding, it's hard to take advantage of his athleticism offensively. Ben Wallace was allowed to be the defensive specialist because Billups, Hamilton, Prince, and Wallace could all score in bunches. This current starting unit doesn't have that. Until they get guys that can (on any given night) put up 20 if they need to, the starting unit needs that fifth option to score. Drummond does not give them that, and I think that's why he was subbing in directly for Monroe.

Click to expand...

There are (at least) two assumptions you have to make for this to make sense. First is that limiting Drummond's minutes would allow us to field a more competitive lineup due to matchups. I'm pretty sure we could just play 4 on 5 instead of subbing Drummond in and not have much of a dropoff in the results from our current starting lineup.

The other assumption you have to make is to equate Drummond's offensive ability to Ben Wallace's (i.e. almost zero). This is totally ridiculous. Ben was a career 47% FG shooter. Remember the years when LB would try to get Ben going on offense by making it a point to feed him the ball? He still only shot 42% and 45% those years. Your position is not credible when you have to make this comparison.

There are (at least) two assumptions you have to make for this to make sense. First is that limiting Drummond's minutes would allow us to field a more competitive lineup due to matchups. I'm pretty sure we could just play 4 on 5 instead of subbing Drummond in and not have much of a dropoff in the results from our current starting lineup.

The other assumption you have to make is to equate Drummond's offensive ability to Ben Wallace's (i.e. almost zero). This is totally ridiculous. Ben was a career 47% FG shooter. Remember the years when LB would try to get Ben going on offense by making it a point to feed him the ball? He still only shot 42% and 45% those years. Your position is not credible when you have to make this comparison.

Click to expand...

Andre Drummond's FT% in college was 53%, I don't really consider that a different level than Ben Wallace's 47%.

There are (at least) two assumptions you have to make for this to make sense. First is that limiting Drummond's minutes would allow us to field a more competitive lineup due to matchups. I'm pretty sure we could just play 4 on 5 instead of subbing Drummond in and not have much of a dropoff in the results from our current starting lineup.

The other assumption you have to make is to equate Drummond's offensive ability to Ben Wallace's (i.e. almost zero). This is totally ridiculous. Ben was a career 47% FG shooter. Remember the years when LB would try to get Ben going on offense by making it a point to feed him the ball? He still only shot 42% and 45% those years. Your position is not credible when you have to make this comparison.

Click to expand...

All I'm really trying to say is that it's not as simple as "a) Drummond needs to develop and b) Drummond is better than Maxiell." Basketball, as we all know, is like jazz. You can't just insert player A into lineup spot A and expect that player to have the same (or similar) results that they have in lineup spot B. Do I think the team would be better with Drummond starting? Yeah, I do feel that, although it's blatantly clear that Drummond does some very strange things that are indicative of his lack of experience. But I'm not there day in and day out so I'm trying to rationalize why Frank believes otherwise. Nobody is going to buy into the "you have to earn your playing time" argument (even though it makes a great deal of sense), because people already have their opinions on that. My hope is that everyone just calms down and recognizes that it's not as obvious as everyone thinks and that things are far more complicated than we fans want to make them.

All I'm really trying to say is that it's not as simple as "a) Drummond needs to develop and b) Drummond is better than Maxiell." Basketball, as we all know, is like jazz. You can't just insert player A into lineup spot A and expect that player to have the same (or similar) results that they have in lineup spot B. Do I think the team would be better with Drummond starting? Yeah, I do feel that, although it's blatantly clear that Drummond does some very strange things that are indicative of his lack of experience. But I'm not there day in and day out so I'm trying to rationalize why Frank believes otherwise. Nobody is going to buy into the "you have to earn your playing time" argument (even though it makes a great deal of sense), because people already have their opinions on that. My hope is that everyone just calms down and recognizes that it's not as obvious as everyone thinks and that things are far more complicated than we fans want to make them.

Pairing Drummond and Monroe in itself does not do much good if you surround them with the wrong players otherwise. But, there have been times this season when the two have played at the same time, with 3 players that can also play, and the team has rocked on both ends of the floor. In studying film, you know, watching it all in slow motion rather than assume anything, you see our perimeter defense pops out to where it should be for one - and two, yes, Monroe and Drummond do indeed clog the lane, because the other team must collapse in to stop these two from scoring, so you basically end up with around 8 guys near the basket - with two good shooters on the perimeter, our shooters, knocking down uncontested triple tries at a high clip. Yes, it works. Forget the stats for a moment, go study the same film I am studying, and see if you don't agree.

Charlie played a very good game. He played a good floor game. That’s two good games in a row. Like I said, Charlie’s a good player. It’s good to see him out there.

Click to expand...

Last week, we would have assumed that Frank had made a determination from practice that CV wasn't good enough. Now, he's publicly stating that he's a good player, but that our team is so loaded that it is hard to find minutes for him (over a two year span even though we've basically been in last place and CV was one of JD's big FA signings).

I used to jump to conclusions when guys weren't playing, but I guess it doesn't mean that they won't be inserted into the starting lineup tomorrow and it doesn't mean that Frank won't take credit for it when it works better than the current lineup.

Why did it take him so long to bring Stuckey off the bench? Stuck was playing so poorly that he was embarrassed and opted out.

How do we know that Kenglish and Middleton aren't as talented as Singler?

It seems like the Pistons would be best served to have Drummond, Monroe and Knight on the floor together as much as possible. They seem to resist this. I would rather have this group going together taking bad shots over the guaranteed losers they are playing now.

They could still play Singler. Play Stuckey as a backup point (A real bargain!). Tay, Max, Maggette, Chuckles gets them to 9. Break the Will Bynum glass in case of emergency.

Any game where Drummond only plays 14 minutes and he wasn't ejected or fouled out is a loss. The same is true for the 3 of these guys playing together.

Last week, we would have assumed that Frank had made a determination from practice that CV wasn't good enough. Now, he's publicly stating that he's a good player, but that our team is so loaded that it is hard to find minutes for him (over a two year span even though we've basically been in last place and CV was one of JD's big FA signings).

I used to jump to conclusions when guys weren't playing, but I guess it doesn't mean that they won't be inserted into the starting lineup tomorrow and it doesn't mean that Frank won't take credit for it when it works better than the current lineup.

Why did it take him so long to bring Stuckey off the bench? Stuck was playing so poorly that he was embarrassed and opted out.

How do we know that Kenglish and Middleton aren't as talented as Singler?

Click to expand...

Sounds like they're trying to raise his trade value. "He's so awesome, but it's a shame that he doesn't get an opportunity to shine in our system."

Sounds like they're trying to raise his trade value. "He's so awesome, but it's a shame that he doesn't get an opportunity to shine in our system."

Click to expand...

I really hope that is true. It would really be so easy to do. We have always known that he can post numbers. So dumb to kill the market value of your own player when you could have just immediately showcased him and traded him when you realized it wasn't what you were looking for.